Hi Matthew,
On Thu, 2007-10-04 at 10:00 +0530, Srinivasa Ragavan wrote:
> > And while we're at it, can we please drop the meaningless -1.2 suffix
> > from the library names (e.g. libedataserver-1.2.so)? As far as I can
> > tell this is just an artifact from an age before the EDS sonames were
> > properly versioned.
Cue, screaming ... please read:
http://lxr.go-oo.org/source/dba/connectivity/source/drivers/evoab2/EApi.cxx#046
and reconsider ;-) be aware that it takes weeks to months to get that
change up-stream, and months to get a new version of OO.o out, and all
the while OO.o will ~silently fail to work with people's new 'clean'
renamed library e-d-s :-)
AFAIR the name versioning was originally intended to ensure you could
compile & develop multiple versions of evo. on the same system.
> I don't think those application would be happy to do this. There are a
> few apps that use the .so directly without pkgconfig (iirc
> OpenOffice.org).
Quite - we build our OO.o integration (which since it is up-stream has
to run on ~all existing systems - cf. the ISV problem ...), with
internal headers (to unwind the ABI breakage), and explicit dlopening &
hooking out of symbols etc.
> Unless there is a clear nod from the stake holders of those projects, I
> wouldn't be favor of doing this.
Thanks ! :-)
Of course, as long as the dlopens still work, I'm fine with renaming
the core library (to suit people's personal hygiene issues) as long as
we have a compat symlink in perpetuity ;-)
Thanks,
Michael.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <><, Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot
_______________________________________________
Evolution-hackers mailing list
Evolution-hackers@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
